It’s important to pay attention to the name the Holy One has for things.
We name everything according to the number of legs it has
But the Holy One names it according to what’s inside.
Moses had a rod. He thought its name was “staff.”
But its name was “dragonish snake.”
-Rumi
Pay attention to language. We all know the picky grammarian who rages about how split infinitives and dangling participles are the advance signs of the demise of western civilization. Intuitively, we know that grammar does not work that way. Bad grammar doesn’t reach far beyond poor communication, confusion. Or does it?
Of late, I have been watching the public conversation around the Iraq War with keen interest in grammar. By now, most of us are catching on to the deliberate use of key words to skew public perception toward a particular point of view. We now know that “death tax” is code for “inheritance tax” and “war on terror” designates “apocalypse. The public, at last, is catching on. So, the language wars now escalate to a new level, WeaselSpeak.
WeaselSpeak is the deployment of verb voices in the service of ideology. Every verb can be expressed in an active voice (We did that.) or a passive voice (The devil made me do it.). What interests me is the clever deployment of the active and passive voices in public discourse, to be used like paints on a canvass to create a scene.
Here’s how the grammar works. Active Verbs are used for magnification. “Al Quaeda has weapons of mass destruction,” for instance. Such magnification magnifies the alarm in an already alarming statement. Active Verbs make Al Quaeda stand tall. Passive verbs shrink the significance of its objects. “Mistakes were made.” Such shrinkage make errors seem trivial. The trick is to use both to paint a picture. Preachers have known about this for a long time. To pair, “God is mighty irate” with “The devil made me do it” creates a scene of impending doom. So it is with using active and passive verbs in the public dialogue.
With the release of the recent National Intelligence Estimate, warmongering spirits are hot into WeaselSpeak to create an illusion of a Towering Terrorist Threat pitted against a Pitiable Presidential Party. Don’t be fooled. As soon as we have taken the bait, the terms will switch. You’ll hear all about the Our Mighty Mega Military in an active voice, just in time to save the day. Such scenarios are alright for cartoons. They are inappropriate in the real world, where lives are at stake.
Now what’s going to happen to us without the barbarians?
They were a kind of solution for us.
-Constantine Cavafy, "Waiting for the Barbarians"
Thursday, July 19, 2007
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Sister Islam
Right after the 9-11 disaster, I frequently heard the question asked, “Why do they hate us?” Since then, we have turned our attention from trying to understand to striking back. Now we're embroiled in the so called War on Terror. In the process the question has been driven underground. It may be time to explore “Why do they hate us?” again.
We were all looking for a crash course in Islam hoping, no doubt, that we might understand our way out of the crushing dilemmas we face. So, where does one start looking for a way through the maze posed by 9-11? Two books beam like a searchlight out of the Islamic world, offering vivid views of its seething cultural oppression, as well as its quirks.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s biographical work, Infidel, reads like fast paced fiction. Seeking refuge around the Arab world, and finally in the West, Ail hopscotched in and out of Muslim and westernized societies. In a brutal series of life experiences, she leaves the reader asking how this woman kept her wits about her. The second half of the book details her settlement in Holland where she was elected to serve in the Dutch parliament. In the aftermath of the murder of her filmmaking partner, Theo Van Gogh, she fled to the United States seeking refuge from the always present threat of violence from coreligionists.
A second read is The Trouble With Islam Today. It is an intellectual/biographical work. In it we watch Canadian Irshad Manji wrestle with her unique place with one foot in an Islamic world and another immersed in Canadian society. Manji is dogged in her pursuit of a meeting place between the two worlds. She is most helpful for the descriptions of the sorts of dynamics she pushes against in the conforming and closed system of the religion of her childhood. Mainstream American readers will recognize the pitfalls presented in the book as the tendencies of the dark underbelly of our own nation’s co-religionists.
These women offer some some important themes to their readers on the question, "Why do they hate us?" I'm not sure they hate us as much as they like they way things are set up.
First, is the matter of gender roles. They are a hidden, but potent source of religious culture, both in the Muslim and the Christian worlds. They also tend to “take over.” One need only refer to the frantic discussions about women’s roles and/or GLBT marriages to see gender hard at work. When religious systems surrender to gender based hierarchies, there is faith trouble. Believe it or not, faith is not primarily about sex! Yet, gender controversy and gender rules seem to subvert even the best constructed faith systems. And when they are given a central role, they ultimately create oppression.
Second, in the matter of Holy Scripture. It matters a lot what you assume as you study holy writing. The brittle and brutal face of Islam begins in dogma about a particular way of treating the Qu’ran. (Manji calls this foundamentalism. It is the attitude that occasionally surfaces in the bumper strip “God said it, I believe it, That settles it.) These are closed end systems that seek control over others, rather than truth. Isn’t this the way we in the west treat the Bible when we are at our worst? When Bible or Qu’ran are used chiefly to regulate, they lose their heart, their adventure. Holy texts, well used, can spark creativity, understanding and vision to build a world alive to God alive in it. I am never happier than when I meet a person who has the skill to use sacred texts as they were intended, as a stimulus to creative living.
The battle of world religions is not between Muslims and Christians. It is about a division within each religion. Those who treat their faith as a medium of control, of domination, populate one side of the divide. Those whose faith empowers, encourages and urges us creative living, reside on another. It is rare when looking at faith "from the outside" can give such a penetrating view into our own. Our Islamic sisters have a message for both religious communities.
We were all looking for a crash course in Islam hoping, no doubt, that we might understand our way out of the crushing dilemmas we face. So, where does one start looking for a way through the maze posed by 9-11? Two books beam like a searchlight out of the Islamic world, offering vivid views of its seething cultural oppression, as well as its quirks.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s biographical work, Infidel, reads like fast paced fiction. Seeking refuge around the Arab world, and finally in the West, Ail hopscotched in and out of Muslim and westernized societies. In a brutal series of life experiences, she leaves the reader asking how this woman kept her wits about her. The second half of the book details her settlement in Holland where she was elected to serve in the Dutch parliament. In the aftermath of the murder of her filmmaking partner, Theo Van Gogh, she fled to the United States seeking refuge from the always present threat of violence from coreligionists.
A second read is The Trouble With Islam Today. It is an intellectual/biographical work. In it we watch Canadian Irshad Manji wrestle with her unique place with one foot in an Islamic world and another immersed in Canadian society. Manji is dogged in her pursuit of a meeting place between the two worlds. She is most helpful for the descriptions of the sorts of dynamics she pushes against in the conforming and closed system of the religion of her childhood. Mainstream American readers will recognize the pitfalls presented in the book as the tendencies of the dark underbelly of our own nation’s co-religionists.
These women offer some some important themes to their readers on the question, "Why do they hate us?" I'm not sure they hate us as much as they like they way things are set up.
First, is the matter of gender roles. They are a hidden, but potent source of religious culture, both in the Muslim and the Christian worlds. They also tend to “take over.” One need only refer to the frantic discussions about women’s roles and/or GLBT marriages to see gender hard at work. When religious systems surrender to gender based hierarchies, there is faith trouble. Believe it or not, faith is not primarily about sex! Yet, gender controversy and gender rules seem to subvert even the best constructed faith systems. And when they are given a central role, they ultimately create oppression.
Second, in the matter of Holy Scripture. It matters a lot what you assume as you study holy writing. The brittle and brutal face of Islam begins in dogma about a particular way of treating the Qu’ran. (Manji calls this foundamentalism. It is the attitude that occasionally surfaces in the bumper strip “God said it, I believe it, That settles it.) These are closed end systems that seek control over others, rather than truth. Isn’t this the way we in the west treat the Bible when we are at our worst? When Bible or Qu’ran are used chiefly to regulate, they lose their heart, their adventure. Holy texts, well used, can spark creativity, understanding and vision to build a world alive to God alive in it. I am never happier than when I meet a person who has the skill to use sacred texts as they were intended, as a stimulus to creative living.
The battle of world religions is not between Muslims and Christians. It is about a division within each religion. Those who treat their faith as a medium of control, of domination, populate one side of the divide. Those whose faith empowers, encourages and urges us creative living, reside on another. It is rare when looking at faith "from the outside" can give such a penetrating view into our own. Our Islamic sisters have a message for both religious communities.
Monday, July 9, 2007
Evangelical Myopia?
Get Some Glasses!
When “W” came out in the 2000 presidential debates touting Jesus Christ as the greatest philosopher in human history, eyebrows raised across the globe, particularly in Europe. Europeans “just don’t get it,” when it comes to understanding American religion. I am often surprised at the degree to which we do “get it” in spite of ourselves. Beside the fact that every hamlet in the U.S. has its own Christian Broadcasting Outlet and television’s evangelists are ubiquitous, we are a culture marinated in one basic religious message, about which we are remarkably uncritical. On this continent, at least, popular culture automatically parrots the assumptions of the evangelical line. (I am astonished at the degree to which American Roman Catholics have adopted this way of thinking.) Where did it come from?
First, a disclaimer. I consider myself an evangelical in the root sense of the Greek word. Euangelion, (lit. Good News from the angels), describes the things angels would say were they talking to you. “Behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all the people”. . . that sort of thing. Good News, it says. I wondered how it got to be such bad news in our time. While reading Elizabeth Brown Pryor’s excellent biography of General Robert E. Lee, "Reading the Man," I was surprised to find that the evangelical message of today is rooted in the life of the Old South and its cataclysmic defeat in America's Civil War. Consider the following hallmarks of 21st century American Evangelicalism.
Family Values It is the bread and butter of evangelical morality that “Normal” religion is an ordered household with a place for everything and everything in its place. In fact, family values is rooted in the plantation households of the prewar South. The truth was then that a Plantation was a rather unpleasant, often brutal, place. If there was serenity there, it was at the big house, if it was anywhere. There, you could ignore all that was going on around you. Slaves had constantly to be policed, assigned and watched. Wilderness was a constant threat to successful farming. Isolation was the normal experience of plantation life. Voila, you have the rough shape of what we know as family values. . . a normal existence forged by beating back or ignoring a hostile and encroaching world. It should be no surprise that plantation values came to church with our ancestors. Family Values as we know them today are simply those Plantation Values of yesteryear. There, the message of the angels is not good news. It is most often about suspicion, about threat and about maintaining order. The message of such angels is “Be afraid and Watch Out!”. . . and with good reason.
I’m not OK; You’re not OK. Defeat in the Civil War produced another peculiar quirk of faith. As Pryor writes, “had (Lee) been wrong to believe that God favored the South? If God’s favor lay elsewhere, as Union victory seemed to indicate, had he defied God’s will by defending the Confederacy and all it stood for? . . Evangelical theology had given Southerners a convenient way out of the corner by claiming that God loved best those whom he chastened. Self-blame was limited to small failings of pride and ingratitude rather than a breach of the most sacred commandments.” Today’s persistent evangelical focus on the tiniest of concerns is rooted here, along with an inability convincingly to grasp the bigger picture. Modern evangelicalism scrupulously directs moral concerns, often missing engagement with the greater issues of our time. Examples abound of this micro morality in the midst of some rather glaring social faux pas’. We all recognize this as a ethos peculiar to the religion we find “in the air” in these United States.
Just Me and Jesus Perhaps most memorable about the Rebel army was the degree to which its members were so personal in their approach to war. (It was an army in which the folks in the trenches elected their officers!) So, discipline in the ranks had a different flavor in the Confederate Army. Leaders often relied on and encouraged unorthodox and highly individualized fighting style. Perhaps most memorable were the raiders of J.E.B. Stuart, whose acts of individuality are remembered in the Old Confederacy to this day. Be that as it may, the Rebel armies revered the personal styles of the warriors. It should be no surprise that the ethos of evangicalism reflects those eccentric warriors.
Why don’t those Europeans understand our Evangelicals? The short answer is that they did not live through our Civil War. Maybe it is time to ask, “Are the values of the Old Confederacy suitable to the America of the early 21st century?” Clearly, our Iraq disaster, simply the latest symptom of this peculiar way of looking at the world, dicates a hearty NO! (Lest you think Iraq is an abberation, one of a kind, there are plenty more examples where that came from.) We have a job to do if we are to rebuild the theological foundations in this nation. But, where to start?
When “W” came out in the 2000 presidential debates touting Jesus Christ as the greatest philosopher in human history, eyebrows raised across the globe, particularly in Europe. Europeans “just don’t get it,” when it comes to understanding American religion. I am often surprised at the degree to which we do “get it” in spite of ourselves. Beside the fact that every hamlet in the U.S. has its own Christian Broadcasting Outlet and television’s evangelists are ubiquitous, we are a culture marinated in one basic religious message, about which we are remarkably uncritical. On this continent, at least, popular culture automatically parrots the assumptions of the evangelical line. (I am astonished at the degree to which American Roman Catholics have adopted this way of thinking.) Where did it come from?
First, a disclaimer. I consider myself an evangelical in the root sense of the Greek word. Euangelion, (lit. Good News from the angels), describes the things angels would say were they talking to you. “Behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all the people”. . . that sort of thing. Good News, it says. I wondered how it got to be such bad news in our time. While reading Elizabeth Brown Pryor’s excellent biography of General Robert E. Lee, "Reading the Man," I was surprised to find that the evangelical message of today is rooted in the life of the Old South and its cataclysmic defeat in America's Civil War. Consider the following hallmarks of 21st century American Evangelicalism.
Family Values It is the bread and butter of evangelical morality that “Normal” religion is an ordered household with a place for everything and everything in its place. In fact, family values is rooted in the plantation households of the prewar South. The truth was then that a Plantation was a rather unpleasant, often brutal, place. If there was serenity there, it was at the big house, if it was anywhere. There, you could ignore all that was going on around you. Slaves had constantly to be policed, assigned and watched. Wilderness was a constant threat to successful farming. Isolation was the normal experience of plantation life. Voila, you have the rough shape of what we know as family values. . . a normal existence forged by beating back or ignoring a hostile and encroaching world. It should be no surprise that plantation values came to church with our ancestors. Family Values as we know them today are simply those Plantation Values of yesteryear. There, the message of the angels is not good news. It is most often about suspicion, about threat and about maintaining order. The message of such angels is “Be afraid and Watch Out!”. . . and with good reason.
I’m not OK; You’re not OK. Defeat in the Civil War produced another peculiar quirk of faith. As Pryor writes, “had (Lee) been wrong to believe that God favored the South? If God’s favor lay elsewhere, as Union victory seemed to indicate, had he defied God’s will by defending the Confederacy and all it stood for? . . Evangelical theology had given Southerners a convenient way out of the corner by claiming that God loved best those whom he chastened. Self-blame was limited to small failings of pride and ingratitude rather than a breach of the most sacred commandments.” Today’s persistent evangelical focus on the tiniest of concerns is rooted here, along with an inability convincingly to grasp the bigger picture. Modern evangelicalism scrupulously directs moral concerns, often missing engagement with the greater issues of our time. Examples abound of this micro morality in the midst of some rather glaring social faux pas’. We all recognize this as a ethos peculiar to the religion we find “in the air” in these United States.
Just Me and Jesus Perhaps most memorable about the Rebel army was the degree to which its members were so personal in their approach to war. (It was an army in which the folks in the trenches elected their officers!) So, discipline in the ranks had a different flavor in the Confederate Army. Leaders often relied on and encouraged unorthodox and highly individualized fighting style. Perhaps most memorable were the raiders of J.E.B. Stuart, whose acts of individuality are remembered in the Old Confederacy to this day. Be that as it may, the Rebel armies revered the personal styles of the warriors. It should be no surprise that the ethos of evangicalism reflects those eccentric warriors.
Why don’t those Europeans understand our Evangelicals? The short answer is that they did not live through our Civil War. Maybe it is time to ask, “Are the values of the Old Confederacy suitable to the America of the early 21st century?” Clearly, our Iraq disaster, simply the latest symptom of this peculiar way of looking at the world, dicates a hearty NO! (Lest you think Iraq is an abberation, one of a kind, there are plenty more examples where that came from.) We have a job to do if we are to rebuild the theological foundations in this nation. But, where to start?
Thursday, July 5, 2007
Nurturing Religious Pluralism
"Either you are with us or against us," say leaders in American Socitey. If you seek a "third way," you are in for some relief. Dr. Eboo Patel brings message of religious pluralism grown from his roots in the practice of Islam in India. He was the guest on today's broadcast of Diane Reahm's Show on NPR. His presentation offered hope for any who seek to build communities of tolerance and hope. Patel notes that the dividing line between religions is not along faith lines, but around attitude lines. There are those who have the only way. There are others whose faiths welcome conversation across faith lines. The damaging fruit of the "only way" crowd is, only now, becoming clear. We do need a different way. I recommend to you Patel's work with the Interfaith Youth Core. The organization works with young people to build mutual understanding between religious communities through shared service. What a breath of fresh air! Check out the webist at www.ifyc.org.
It is good news. Pass it on!
It is good news. Pass it on!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
